Afghanistan

Lord Astor of Hever: To ask Her Majesty's Government for which other countries' armed forces the United Kingdom provides air bridge transport to Afghanistan.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: The United Kingdom provides transport to Afghanistan from RAF bases in Britain, Germany and Cyprus via the strategic airbridge. Whilst this is predominantly used for British personnel we also provide transport for military personnel from ISAF contributory nations, as well as members of the Afghan National Army. Additionally, foreign exchange personnel attached to UK units are carried when those units have been deployed to operations in Afghanistan, subject to the agreement of their own Governments.

Armed Forces: Aircraft

Lord Astor of Hever: To ask Her Majesty's Government what equipment and materials are used by the Royal Air Force for de-icing transport aircraft.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: The RAF currently uses two different types of aircraft de-icer trucks, the Douglas and the SDI. The RAF uses a fluid called AL-34 to de-ice aircraft surfaces. The RAF plans to replace the Douglas model and companies will be invited to tender for this work later this year.

Armed Forces: Detention

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Statement by Lord Tunnicliffe on 26 February on Armed Forces: Detention (Official Report, House of Lords, cols. 352—55), whether they will publish information about the system enabling HM armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan to detain people posing a threat to United Kingdom troops, allies or the local population while ensuring that the United Kingdom's obligations are complied with, including the safeguards against abuse.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the statement by Lord Tunnicliffe on 26 February on Armed Forces: Detention (Official Report, House of Lords, cols. 352—55), whether they have changed the system enabling HM armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan to detain people posing a threat to United Kingdom troops, allies or the local population by introducing new safeguards against abuse so as to ensure that the United Kingdom's obligations are complied with; and, if so, whether they will publish details of the changes made to the system.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: Further to my noble friend's Statement to the House on 26 February outlining the improvements, particularly on detention record keeping, the MoD has made to its detention practices, we have put in place rigorous safeguards to ensure that detainees are treated properly. We will continue to carry out detention operations in accordance with our legal and policy obligations, in concert with the US and other allies. I have nothing further to add to what was said with regard to the Memoranda of Understanding the UK has entered into with other nations to protect against potential abuse of detainees.

Children: Street Children

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Crawley on 7 October 2008 (WA 11), how much funding was provided in each of the past seven years to the street and working children programme in Burma; and to which non-governmental organisations and providers the funding was allocated.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Crawley on 7 October 2008 (WA 10—11), how much funding was provided in each of the past seven years to the street children project Streets Ahead.

Lord Tunnicliffe: The Department for International Development's (DfID) funding to the street children project examples quoted in the Answer of 7 October in Kyrgyzstan, Burma and Zimbabwe by financial year are as follows:
	EveryChild, Prevention and Rehabilitation Services for Street Children in Osh, Kyrgyzstan Republic, April-2005 to March-2009 (project completed).
	
		
			 Total £184,557 
			 2005-06 £22,376 
			 2006-07 £73,377 
			 2007-08 £66,692 
			 2008-09 £22,112 
		
	
	World Vision—To improve the Status and Quality of Life among Children, Burma, May 1998 to June 2004 (project completed).
	
		
			 Total £442,369 
			 1998-99 £89,247 
			 1999-00 £75,338 
			 2000-01 £104,453 
			 2001-02 £51,502 
			 2002-03 £71,619 
			 2003-04 £40,874 
			 2004-05 £9,336 
		
	
	UNICEF—"Streets Ahead" for Orphans and Vulnerable Children (OVC), Zimbabwe, July 2005 to March 2009 (project on-going).
	
		
			 Total US$ 235,889 
			 2005-06 US$55,888 
			 2006-07 US$34,225 
			 2007-08 US$52,559 
			 2008-09 US$93,217

Conflict Prevention and Human Security

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will support the establishment of an international panel on conflict prevention and human security; and, if so, what proposals they have for its terms of reference, structure, and funding.

Lord Malloch-Brown: Conflict prevention and resolution is at the heart of the Government's policy framework. Public Service Agreement 30 sets out the Government's commitment to reducing the impact of conflict through enhanced UK and international efforts. We have not yet given detailed consideration to the proposal from the East-West Institute's International Task Force on Preventive Diplomacy about the formation of an international panel on conflict prevention and human security.

Countryside and Rights of Way Act

Lord Greaves: To ask Her Majesty's Government what are the procedures and timetable for the review of the access maps in England under Section 10 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: Section 10 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 requires Natural England to review, at intervals of not more than 10 years, the conclusive maps of open country and registered common land issued under that Act. The current conclusive maps require review by 2014-15.
	The Act does not set down specific procedures for this review. Natural England intends to consult publicly on how it should be conducted, beginning with a stakeholder workshop on 31 March 2009. Further details will be published, once available, on Natural England's website.

Disabled People: UN Convention

Lord Morris of Manchester: To ask Her Majesty's Government what further progress has been made towards ratification of the United Nations Convention on Disability Rights.

Lord McKenzie of Luton: On the 3 March I laid a Written Statement saying that the Explanatory Memorandum and Command Paper for ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities would be laid before Parliament on that date. These documents were laid and they are currently the subject of parliamentary scrutiny.
	Progressing to this stage, along with the signing of the Optional Protocol to the UN Convention on 27 February, demonstrates the Government's firm commitment both to the UN convention and to the principle that it enshrines—that disabled people have, and should enjoy, the same human rights as other people.

Energy: Wind Turbines

Lord Taylor of Holbeach: To ask Her Majesty's Government under what circumstances the national grid is unable to accept excess electricity from small wind turbines; and what then happens to the output.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: National Grid owns the high voltage electricity transmission system in England and Wales and operates the high voltage electricity transmission system across Great Britain. Distribution network operators (DNOs) own and operate the lower voltage distribution networks. Typically, small generators—eg small wind turbines and small wind farms—connect to the lower voltage distribution networks throughout Great Britain, rather than the high voltage transmission network. DNOs manage wind generation connected on their network.
	Small scale embedded generators can normally be connected to the distribution networks without the need for the DNO to carry out detailed network studies to assess the impact of the connection. Therefore, embedded generators can then generate without restriction.
	Small wind turbines—the DNO would assess the connection to ensure that the distribution network would be capable of accepting the output from the generator and this would identify any remedial works required. Once any remedial work was completed, the generation would be able to operate without the imposition of any restrictions.
	Small wind farms—the DNO will make an assessment of whether the connection and operation of the generator will impact on the transmission system. If it will not have, then as for small wind turbines, the generation would be able to operate without any restrictions being imposed by the DNO. If there is an impact on the transmission system, then National Grid in some cases, when balancing the electricity system, could request the DNO to reduce output which will in turn, request this of a generator connected to its network. However, more typically, when balancing the high voltage network, National Grid will ask generators directly connected to its network to reduce demand.

Energy: Wind Turbines

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: To ask Her Majesty's Government what action they are taking to encourage companies to manufacture or assemble components for both on-shore and off-shore wind turbines in the localities in which those turbines are to be erected.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: DECC has an established supply chain programme which links the UK supply chain to wind turbine manufacturers and aims to encourage companies to diversify into wind manufacturing. The team was closely involved in the work to bring Clipper Windpower (a US wind turbine manufacturer) into the UK, where it is developing its Britannia Project, a 7.5-10MW offshore wind turbine.
	Building on this work, the Government will be launching an Office for Renewable Energy Deployment (ORED), which will be a one-stop-shop for business and other stakeholders aimed at removing supply chain barriers to renewables deployment.

Extraordinary Rendition

Lord Judd: To ask Her Majesty's Government what action they are taking with European Union governments, the government of the United States, Commonwealth governments and other concerned governments (a) to determine the extent of post-rendition practices, (b) to identify those responsible, and (c) to take appropriate legal action where illegal practices are identified; and what action they are taking to prevent such practices in future.

Lord Malloch-Brown: There is no universally accepted understanding of the meaning of the term "rendition". Accordingly the need for, and extent of, any action to determine the extent of post-rendition practices can not be assessed at a generic level.
	In recent years public debate has focused on the term "extraordinary rendition". The Intelligence and Security Committee has defined this as the extra judicial transfer of persons between jurisdictions for the purposes of detention and interrogation outside the normal legal system, where there is a real risk of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. The Government unreservedly condemn any "extraordinary rendition" to torture.
	With regard to the identification and prosecution of crimes, these are a matter for the relevant authorities. Where there is sufficient evidence of unlawful activity on board an aircraft, or anywhere else, in UK territory or airspace, be it a rendition operation or otherwise, this would be investigated by the UK authorities. Where appropriate, the UK law enforcement authorities work with colleagues abroad in this respect.
	With regard to the prevention of future rendition flights, our international partners are aware that we would grant permission for a rendition flight to pass through UK territory or airspace only if we were satisfied that it would accord with our domestic law and international obligations. We expect all states to abide by their international obligations.

Fluoridation

Earl Baldwin of Bewdley: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the chief dental officer's letter of guidance in February 2008 on Fluoridation of Drinking Water (Gateway 9361) should have contained the claim in paragraph 5 that the York review confirmed that "there was no evidence of any risk to health" from fluoridation, when the senior reviewers of the York team stated in the British Medical Journal of 16 June 2001 that "we have been assiduous in our paper, our full report, and our contact with the media, not to convey a message of no evidence of harm"; and, if not, whether a correction will be brought to the attention of the addressees of the chief dental officer's letter.

Lord Darzi of Denham: We stand by this assertion. The following quotations are from the executive summary of the report of the York review:
	"Overall the findings of the bone fracture studies showed small variations around the 'no effect' mark. A meta-regression of bone fracture studies also found no association with water fluoridation". "Overall, no clear association between water fluoridation and incidence of mortality of bone cancers, thyroid cancer or all cancers was found".
	The Chief Dental Officer's letter acknowledged York's concerns about the quality of the research available and reiterated the department's commitment to a continuing programme of research to strengthen the evidence base on fluoridation.

Gambling

Lord Hanningfield: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Lord Carter of Barnes on 9 March (WA 208), how many of the 8,481 new licences issued between 1 September 2007 and 31 August 2008 relate to establishments licensed under the previous regime.

Lord Carter of Barnes: The Gambling Commission has advised that its data do not indicate whether those premises licensed between 1 September 2007 and 31 August 2008 were previously licensed under the old regime.

Guantanamo Bay

Lord Judd: To ask Her Majesty's Government what action they are taking with European Union governments, the Government of the United States, Commonwealth governments and other appropriate governments to assist the United States administration in closing Guantanamo Bay.

Lord Malloch-Brown: We continue to discuss with the US Government how best we can work with them to secure the closure of Guantanamo Bay.
	The UK has already made a significant contribution to reducing the number of detainees, by taking back nine UK nationals and five former legal UK residents.
	Our request for the release and return of the final former legal UK resident, Shaker Aamer, stands. We will continue to encourage our allies to assist in reducing the numbers of those detained; for instance, by accepting the transfer of detainees cleared for release.
	We have shared our experience of accepting former detainees with our European partners and would gladly share this with Commonwealth Governments and others.

Health: Chiropody

Lord Jones: To ask Her Majesty's Government what measures they have taken to improve chiropody in the National Health Service.

Lord Darzi of Denham: The National Health Service has seen unprecedented levels of investment and a period of expansion in the workforce since 1997. The number of chiropodists employed in the NHS has increased by 15.6 per cent since 1997, from 3,286 to 3,799 in 2007.
	To help trusts develop their policy for access to foot care including chiropody, guidance is included in the national service frameworks for older people, diabetes, and long-term conditions, and the White Paper, Our Health, Our Care, Our Say: ANew Direction for Community Services.
	An improved allied health professional (AHP) service offer, which includes chiropody, was announced by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Health in October 2008. This offer sets out the first steps needed to ensure AHPs are fully integrated into the wider Next Stage Review agenda, and includes mandating data collection; improving ease of access and promoting the benefits of self-referral to physiotherapy and encouraging local extension to other AHP services; and improving quality and empower patients. Aspects of this offer are included in the Operating Framework for the NHS in England 2009-10. A copy has already been placed in the Library.
	It is for primary care trusts in partnership with local stakeholders, including practice based commissioners, local government and the public to take forward this work as appropriate in their local communities. We will support the implementation of the improved AHP service offer through the work of the Transforming Community Services Programme.
	Foot care services for older people are being reviewed as part of the prevention package announced in May 2008. The purpose of the package is to raise awareness among older people of the existing core prevention services to which they are entitled and to support the service in making improvements in other key areas such as foot care. The package is due to be launched later this year.

Health: Hospitals

Lord Jones: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many new hospitals have been completed for National Health Service purposes since 1998.

Lord Darzi of Denham: One hundred new hospital building schemes have begun construction and opened since 1998.

Health: International Aid

Baroness Northover: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the situation in relation to HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria in Zimbabwe; and what help they are giving in those areas.

Lord Tunnicliffe: The economic and political mismanagement of Zimbabwe over the past few years has made it increasingly difficult to control the spread of AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. Health services have deteriorated significantly as trained health workers are unable to survive on meagre state salaries and vital medicines have been hard for the Government to source and distribute. Outreach services, which are essential to managing all three of these diseases, have broken down as a result of failing maintenance of vehicles, poor salaries, and a shortage of fuel and supplies.
	While the HIV prevalence rate has decreased to 15.6 per cent, the number of people requiring anti-retroviral medicines (ARVs) continues to rise. Currently, 132,000 people are able to access ARVs while about 340,000 require them. The UK is providing £24 million this year for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of critical health needs in Zimbabwe. This includes £10 million to respond to HIV and AIDS including support to ARVs, prevention and mitigation, £6 million for the procurement and distribution of vital medicines to treat all three diseases, £250,000 to support an emergency indoor spraying programme to avert a malaria epidemic this year and £5 million to address the particular needs of pregnant women and their newborns, including the prevention of mother to child transmission of HIV. The Board of the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria has also approved a $500 million grant to Zimbabwe as part of its round 8 allocations. Around 5 per cent of this could be attributed to UK through core contributions to the Global Fund.

Health: International Aid

Baroness Northover: To ask Her Majesty's Government what the Department for International Development's priorities are in the next 12 months on the monitoring and control of global tuberculosis.

Lord Tunnicliffe: The Department for International Development (DfID) understands that monitoring progress in tuberculosis (TB) control is essential. DfID funds the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the STOP TB Partnership, which both lead on this.
	Clear priorities for monitoring and evaluation have been identified by the WHO:
	maintaining the annual documentation of global TB disease burden, TB control implementation, and financing for TB control;technical assistance to 10 countries that need to start implementing surveys of the prevalence of TB disease in 2009-2010, which are among a list of 21 global priority countries;regional workshops to conduct in-depth analysis of data from surveillance systems and surveys and to build capacity in monitoring and evaluation, particularly in Asia and Africa; andstrengthen the WHO secretariat of the Global Task Force on TB measurement, to ensure the necessary strategic and technical guidance to countries and coordination among international agencies.

Health: International Aid

Baroness Northover: To ask Her Majesty's Government what support the Department for International Development plans to provide to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria, which is facing a deficit of $5 billion.

Lord Tunnicliffe: In 2007 the UK Government made an unprecedented long-term commitment of up to £1 billion between 2008-15, providing that the Global Fund is receiving good quality proposals, continuing to perform well, and is demonstrating sustainable impact. This was on top of the £359 million we had already given the fund between 2002 and 2008.
	This additional contribution is broken down as follows. We have pledged £360 million over the 3 year replenishment period (2008-10), with £30 million of this subject to demand and results. This represents a 20 per cent increase on our previous level of commitment. Over and above this, we also pledged an additional amount of up to £640 million from 2011-15.
	The UK is the second largest bilateral donor on HIV/AIDS and on health worldwide. Support to the Global Fund is one of the important channels for the Department for International Development's (DfID) support to the three diseases and wider health systems. In June 2008, the UK announced an additional £6 billion on health systems and services by 2015, over and above our support to the Global Fund.

Health: International Aid

Baroness Northover: To ask Her Majesty's Government what action the Department for International Development is taking to ensure that international development and tuberculosis are discussed at this year's G8 meeting in Italy in order to advance the measures on international development initiated by the United Kingdom at the Gleneagles G8 meeting in 2005.

Lord Tunnicliffe: The Gleneagles summit in 2005 ensured international development went to the top of the global agenda. The G8 has made significant commitments to promote international development and accelerate progress on health related targets since then. In 2007, the G8 pledged US$60 billion for health initiatives including funding to help tackle tuberculosis, and there has been significant progress on treating HIV, providing immunisation against polio and supplying bed nets to protect against malaria.
	However, huge challenges remain. As with previous summits, the UK Government will continue to work through all available channels in the lead up to the G8 summit in Italy to ensure development remains a high priority for the leaders' agenda. The UK remains strongly committed to reducing death and suffering from tuberculosis, and will encourage other G8 partners to ensure that tuberculosis is addressed as part of the comprehensive package of G8 measures. This should enable developing countries to make faster progress towards the millennium development goal targets.

Health: Pharmaceutical Services

Lord Jones: To ask Her Majesty's Government what measures they have taken to improve Community Pharmacy Services.

Lord Darzi of Denham: The White Paper, Pharmacy in England: Building on Strengths—Delivering the Future, published in April 2008, set out the Government's future vision for developing quality pharmaceutical services to patients and consumers through pharmacies in England.
	Good progress is being made in implementing the White Paper to achieve this vision.

House of Lords: Publications

Lord Laird: To ask the Chairman of Committees whether he will ensure that all House of Lords publications are accessible to those who are dyslexic.

Lord Brabazon of Tara: House of Lords publications are available on the internet in HTML and (in most cases) PDF format. Their structure is normally straightforward and suitable for text-reading software.
	In addition, for internal purposes and certain external publications, the House of Lords administration has adopted visual identity guidelines which will be introduced in April. These guidelines encourage offices and departments to observe the Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) guidelines, which are similar to the British Dyslexia Association guidelines.

Human Rights

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government which cases or groups of cases against the United Kingdom heard in the European Court of Human Rights in the past five years have they (a) won, and (b) lost; what were the subject matters of the cases; and, of those lost, which they requested a referral to the court's Grand Chamber or intend so to request; and whether they will review their criteria for defending cases and not requesting referrals.

Lord Malloch-Brown: In 2008 the total number of applications against the United Kingdom in the European Court of Human Rights which were declared inadmissible or struck out and judgments which found no violation against the United Kingdom was 1,246. In the same year there were 27 judgments finding at least one violation against the United Kingdom. The equivalent figures for the previous four years are set out below:
	2007: 410/19
	2006: 971/10
	2005: 732/15
	2004: 721/19.
	These statistics are available from the annual reports of the European Court of Human Rights which can be found on the court's website at www.echr.coe.int/ECHR/EN/Header/Reports+and+Statistics/Reports/Annual+surveys+of+activity/.
	The 2008 statistics are taken from the provisional version of the court's 2008 annual report.
	Further information about judgments, including details of the subject matter, is available from the court's annual reports which can be found on the court's website at www.echr.coe.int/ECHR/EN/Header/Reports+and+Statistics/Reports/Annual+Reports/.
	A list of cases in respect of which the United Kingdom has requested a referral to the court's Grand Chamber is not available. But from 1 January 2004 to 10 March 2008 the Grand Chamber delivered judgments in 14 United Kingdom cases. Details of all the judgments are available at the court's website at http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?sessionid =20467014&skin=hudoc-en.
	Decisions on whether and how to defend applications and whether to seek a referral of a judgment to the Grand Chamber are made on a case-by-case basis.

Human Rights

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answers by Lord Bach on 28 January (WA 56—57) and 24 February (WA 50), what are their reasons for not seeking to ratify the Fourth Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights with reservations similar to those made by the United Kingdom when ratifying the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, in respect of nationality and immigration issues.

Lord Bach: As I explained in my response to the noble Lord on 24 February (Official Report, col. WA50), Article 57 of the European Convention on Human Rights does not permit reservations of a general character, and Article 19 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties does not permit reservations which are incompatible with the object and purpose of the treaty in question. The Fourth Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights has a much more specific focus than the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Ratification of the Fourth Protocol would require significant reservations to two of its four substantive articles. The Government do not consider it appropriate to ratify the Fourth Protocol with such significant reservations to such a large proportion of its substantive provisions. However, the Government will continue to keep this position under review.

Human Rights

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will consider not attending the Review Conference of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Geneva this year, to be co-chaired by Libya and Iran; and whether they will seek to persuade other European Union members not to attend.

Lord Malloch-Brown: The Government have, on several occasions, expressed their view on the Durban Review Conference, the follow-up to the 2001 World Conference Against Racism. We want the conference to forge a collective will to fight against racism in all its forms, in all countries in the world.
	However, the Government remain deeply concerned about the draft outcome document.
	The UK is still engaged in the Durban Review process and we will keep our position under review. We hope that there is still time to return the focus of preparations to reviewing work undertaken to combat racism and implement the 2001 Durban Declaration and Programme of Action, thus enhancing the prospect of a consensus outcome. But a change in this direction will be required for any outcome document to gain our support.
	We will continue to engage with European partners in preparation for this conference.

Immigration

Lord Roberts of Llandudno: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many illegal immigrants there are in the United Kingdom; and how many are returned each year.

Lord West of Spithead: Since the phasing out of embarkation controls in 1994 no Government have ever been able to produce an accurate figure for the number of people who are in the country illegally. By its very nature it is impossible to quantify accurately and that remains the case.
	As part of the Government's 10-point plan for delivery, by 2010 more than 95 per cent of non-EEA foreign nationals will be counted in and out of the country, rising to 100 per cent by 2014. This is part of a sweeping programme of border protection which also includes the global rollout of fingerprint visas, watch-list checks for all travellers before they arrive or depart from the UK and ID cards for foreign nationals.
	The Government's plans, set out in Enforcing the Deal published on 19 June 2008, set a clear goal to target and remove the most harmful people first, working with local authorities and enforcement agencies to shut down the privileges of the UK to those breaking the rules.
	Copies of this document are placed in the Library of the House. It is also available to view at www.ukba. homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/managingourborders/enforcementbusinessplan08_09/enforcementbusinessplan08_09.pdf?view=Binary.
	The Home Office publishes statistics on the number of persons removed and departed voluntarily from the UK on a quarterly and annual basis, and these figures will include illegal immigrants. National statistics on immigration and asylum are placed in the Library of the House and are available from the Home Office's Research, Development and Statistics website at www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/immigration-asylum-stats.html.

Justice: Foreign and International Courts

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many times, and in which cases, they have submitted an amicus curiae brief to a foreign or international court in each of the past three years.

Lord Malloch-Brown: In the past three years, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, on behalf of the Government, have submitted amicus curiae briefs on the following four occasions:
	in proceedings involving the British national, Krishna Maharaj, an amicus brief was filed in July 2006 in the US Supreme Court;in proceedings involving the British national, Linda Carty, an amicus brief was filed in May 2006 in the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division;in proceedings involving the British national, Kenneth Richey, an amicus brief was filed in January 2007 in the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit; andin the Alexis Holyweek Sarei et al vs Rio Tinto plc et al case, an amicus brief was filed in May 2007 in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

Macedonia

Lord Teverson: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they support the Republic of Macedonia in its desire to attend the NATO summit at Strasbourg, France, and Kehl, Germany, in April.

Lord Malloch-Brown: The UK remains a firm supporter of the Republic of Macedonia's, North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) aspirations. However, all meetings at the NATO summit in Strasbourg/Kehl will be held in an allies-only format.
	The UK shares Macedonia's disappointment that an invitation was not extended to join the NATO at its summit in April 2008. However, the summit communiqué concluded that an invitation would be offered as soon as a mutually acceptable solution was reached to the name dispute with Greece. The UK continues to urge both sides to engage in efforts to resolve this issue as quickly as possible.
	My right honourable friend Caroline Flint, Minister for Europe, discussed this issue during her visit to Macedonia on 26 to 28 March 2008, and Foreign and Commonwealth Office officials discussed this matter with the ambassador of the Republic of Macedonia in London on 10 March 2009.

Mongolia

Lord Bates: To ask Her Majesty's Government what consideration they have given to the opening of a British Council office in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.

Lord Malloch-Brown: The British Council does not currently have an office in Mongolia and has no present plans to open one.
	However, British Council programme activity has recently been undertaken in Mongolia. The British Council's Peace Keeping English Project, funded by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Ministry of Defence and the Department for International Development, recently completed its activity in Mongolia. The programme sought to improve the English language abilities of the Mongolian personnel who contribute to its UN peace keeping contingent. In addition, the British Council continues to offer access to its high quality English language materials and administer exams in Mongolia.

NHS Redress Act

Lord Gregson: To ask Her Majesty's Government what progress has been made in the application of the NHS Redress Act 2006.

Lord Darzi of Denham: The NHS Redress Act 2006 is a piece of framework legislation that will need to be enacted through secondary legislation. The department has continually believed that putting in place the appropriate secondary legislation for this piece of work will require considerable stakeholder involvement to discuss the detail around the working of any scheme. This would mean that any legislation could not be implemented any earlier than at least 2010.
	The department considers it is currently more important to embed the general principles of wider redress across the National Health Service—those of apologies and explanations, a spirit of openness, a culture of learning from mistakes and robust investigation—rather than focusing on financial redress only for those cases:
	which are of low monetary value (currently envisaged to be under £20,000);which satisfy set principles in tort law; andwhere financial compensation would be appropriate.
	The significant and important area of work around complaints reform is currently underway and will be implemented in April 2009. It will lay the general foundations of redress, in its wider sense, across health and social care by:
	putting the patient or service user at the heart of any complaints process and ensuring that it will be easier and simpler for people wishing to make a complaint;moving to a more open, accessible, flexible and sensitive approach to responding to complaints;ensuring robust and appropriate investigation;emphasising the benefits of responding to complaints properly to help improve services; andlearning from mistakes.
	Once these principles are embedded across health and social care organisations, applying redress measures more specifically to any particular scheme or initiative (such as in the area of clinical negligence) can be considered further.

Northern Ireland Assembly: Policing and Justice

Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will provide further details on the indication given the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Shaun Woodward, that the Democratic Unionist Party and Sinn Fein have agreed a "way forward" on the devolution of policing and justice to the Northern Ireland Assembly; and whether the statement was made following the matter being discussed at and agreed by the Northern Ireland Executive.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: On 18 November 2008 the First and Deputy First Minister announced they had agreed a process, the completion of which would see the devolution of policing and justice to the Northern Ireland Assembly. They asked the Assembly and Executive Review Committee to produce a report on the modalities of devolution. This report was debated in the Assembly on 20 January 2009 and approved on a cross-community basis before it was noted by the Northern Ireland Executive.

Northern Ireland Office: Cost-saving

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by the Lord President (Baroness Royall of Blaisdon) on 9 February (WA 165—66) concerning the details of efficiency gains delivered by the Northern Ireland Office, which of the forecast efficiency gains for 2007—08 in the 2007 report were not met by the delivery groups; by how much; and for what reason.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: The 2004 Spending Review committed the Northern Ireland Office to achieving a target of £90 million of efficiency gains by March 2008. Some 170 efficiency initiatives were identified across the department to deliver this target and by the end of 2007-08, £103.6 million of efficiency gains had been delivered. £11 million of this overachievement was carried forward into the Comprehensive Spending Review 2007 value for money programme. Due to the number of initiatives involved, and the amount of underlying detail, to provide the details requested would be possible only at disproportionate cost.
	However, details of the efficiency gains delivered by the Northern Ireland Office across the SR04 period (from 2005-06 to 2007-08) are outlined in the Northern Ireland Office's autumn performance report 2008 which is published on the internet at www.nio.gov.uk.

Northern Ireland Office: Staff

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many substitute staff on which £1.4 million was spent, as stated in the Northern Ireland Office's 2007 annual report, were recruited in 2007; why such expenditure was necessary; and whether those staff are still in place.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: During the 2007-08 financial year 86 substitute staff were recruited to the Northern Ireland Office. The staff were employed for a range of reasons, the main being:
	to provide cover where there were insufficient internal staff to undertake the work; to fill vacancies while permanent staff were being recruited; orto cover for staff on maternity leave or on long-term sick.
	Of the 86 recruited, 21 are still in place.

Northern Ireland Office: Taxis

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by the Lord President (Baroness Royall of Blaisdon) on 29 January (WA 76) regarding expenditure on taxis by the Northern Ireland Office in the first two weeks of the 2007—08 financial year, how many journeys were made in total; from where to where did each journey take place; and what was the purpose and cost of each journey.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: As stated in the Written Answer of 29 January (Official Report, col. WA 76), the Northern Ireland Office was invoiced for 37 taxi journeys at a total cost of £323.40 during the first two weeks of the 2007-08 financial year. The previous Answer also noted that in addition to invoiced taxi journeys, other reimbursable taxi costs were reclaimed by staff through travel and subsistence expenses claims for this period. The costs of these journeys are included within incidental expenses and details could be identified only at disproportionate cost.
	Full details of all invoiced taxi journeys in 2007-08 have now been placed in the Library.

Northern Ireland: Human Rights Commission

Lord Laird: To ask Her Majesty's Government further to the Written Answer by Baroness Royall of Blaisdon on 26 January (WA 104), what consideration has been given to the effects on public confidence when deciding how much information to release on appointment procedures for the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they operate a policy of transparency in the appointment of Commissioners to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission; and, if so, how.

Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: Public appointments to the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission are regulated by the Commissioner for Public Appointments and the procedures for making such appointments comply fully with the commissioner's code of practice which can be found at www. publicappointmentscommissioner.org/Code_of_ Practice.
	Paragraph 2.12 of the code of practice states:
	"Openness and transparency
	2.12 To gain public confidence the workings of the appointments system must be clearly visible. All stages of the process, including relevant conversations, must be documented and the information readily available for audit. Information should be stored for a minimum of two years. However:
	personal information about applicants and panel members must remain confidential, unless the individual concerned gives permission for its release;
	data protection legislation must be considered in relation to all recorded information".

Nuclear Safety Advisory Committee

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty's Government why the Nuclear Safety Advisory Committee was disbanded in October 2008; and whether they intend to replace it with another source of independent advice.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The Nuclear Safety Advisory Committee is one of several advisory committees that advise the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). It reached the end of its latest term of office in October 2008. The HSE Board decided to defer any decisions on reconstituting the committee pending the outcome of various reviews. This included taking account of the recommendations of Dr Tim Stone's review of nuclear regulatory arrangements, which were published in January 2009.
	One of Dr Stone's recommendations accepted by the Government was to restructure the HSE's Nuclear Directorate through legislation. The future make-up of any advisory body needs to follow decisions on these arrangements.
	Meanwhile, in addition to its own experts, the HSE is able to call on many external sources of advice on nuclear safety.

Pakistan: Blasphemy Laws

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have made representations to the Government of Pakistan about Mr Hector Aleem, who was arrested in January and accused of blasphemy on evidence alleged to have been extracted under torture; and, if so, what was the result.

Lord Malloch-Brown: We are aware of Mr Aleem's detention but have not made representations to the Government of Pakistan on his behalf. Officials in our high commission in Islamabad have established that Pakistan's Ministry for Human Rights is already engaged in Mr Aleem's case. We will continue to monitor developments but cannot intervene while legal proceedings are in progress.

Petitions

Lord Greaves: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many petitions the Department for Culture, Media and Sport received in (a) 2007, and (b) 2008; what steps the department has taken to publicise them; and whether they will place the text of the petitions received and the number of signatures in the Library of the House.
	To ask Her Majesty's Government what procedures the Department for Culture, Media and Sport has for receiving, acknowledging, dealing with and responding to petitions that it receives from members of the public.

Lord Carter of Barnes: The department registers receipt of all petitions on our central correspondence system. A full response is subsequently sent to the petition organiser, with the intention that the response should be shared with any signatories to the petition.
	The department does not actively publish such material and registers such petitions as general correspondence. As departmental records do not distinguish between representations in the form of petitions and other general correspondence, we do not hold a list of this information in the format requested, and would be unable to locate this information without incurring disproportionate cost.

Public Bodies

Lord Selsdon: To ask Her Majesty's Government which members of the House of Lords are appointees to the non-departmental public bodies listed under "Foreign and Commonwealth Office" in annex A to the report of the Cabinet Office entitled Public Bodies 2008; and what was their appointment and individual remuneration.

Lord Malloch-Brown: My noble friend Lord Kinnock is chair of the British Council.
	The noble and learned Lord, Lord Howe of Aberavon, is president of the Executive Committee of the Great Britain—China Centre.
	My noble friend Lord Foulkes is governor on the Board of the Westminster Foundation for Democracy.
	My noble friend Lady Quinn is a member of the Advisory Council within the Wilton Park Advisory Council.
	None of the Members of the House of Lords receives remuneration for their work.

RAF Brize Norton

Lord Astor of Hever: To ask Her Majesty's Government to what extent ground support at RAF Brize Norton is provided by (a) contractors, and (b) Royal Air Force personnel.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: The majority of the personnel that support the airfield operations at RAF Brize Norton are in units that contain an integrated mix of RAF, MoD civil servant and contractor personnel. These include passenger and aircrew airside transportation, airfield fire crash rescue, cleaning and snow clearance on aircraft manoeuvring areas, aircraft refuelling and aircraft de-icing.
	Air traffic control, airfield emergency medical response, baggage and freight handling, aircraft engineering and aircraft marshalling/dispatch are all provided solely by RAF personnel.
	The bird control unit is manned solely by contractor staff.

RAF Brize Norton

Lord Astor of Hever: To ask Her Majesty's Government how the availability of de-icing equipment, materials and crews at RAF Brize Norton compares with civilian best practice.

Baroness Taylor of Bolton: RAF Brize Norton has sufficient de-icing equipment, materials and manpower to ensure that the airfield can continue to operate in all but the most severe weather. An upgrade programme is currently underway to replace some of the RAF's older equipment and ensure that its de-icing capability is comparable with that of large commercial airfields.

Schools: Admissions

Baroness Jay of Paddington: To ask Her Majesty's Government how many children in London have this year been told that they have no place at a secondary school.

Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: Local authorities are under a duty to provide every child of school age with a school place. No child should be told they do not have a secondary school place.
	On 12 March the Department for Children, Schools and Families published data at national, regional and local authority level on the offers of secondary school places made to parents on 2 March. These data are available on the department's research and statistics gateway website.
	In London, 6.2 per cent of applicants did not receive an offer for one of the schools they had expressed a preference for. This does not mean they are without a school place. In the majority of cases, local authorities will have made offers of a place at an alternative school or given the parents the opportunity to express further preferences for schools with vacant places.

Schools: Admissions

Baroness Jay of Paddington: To ask Her Majesty's Government what official help is available to parents wishing to make an appeal against a school's decision to refuse entry to their child.

Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: The Advisory Centre for Education (ACE) is part funded by the Department for Children, Schools and Families and provides free advice to parents on school admission appeals. Local authorities and admission authorities are required to give parents appropriate guidance and information before their hearing to enable them to prepare their case for an appeal. Choice Advice is an independent service (also funded by the department) provided by local authorities to support parents who are most likely to struggle with the admissions system, including the appeals process. Choice advisers are now allowed to accompany or represent appellants at hearings.

Schools: Admissions

Baroness Jay of Paddington: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they have any proposals regarding the system of entry to secondary schools in London, and the need to avoid leaving children with no place at a state secondary school.

Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: Local authorities are under a duty to provide every child of school age with a school place. No child should be left without a secondary school place.
	All local authorities and admission authorities are required to comply with the statutory school admissions code and related legislation. The code requires that the way in which all school places are allocated is fair and transparent. We do not propose having a separate system for London.
	Following consultation during 2008, a revised code came into force on 10 February 2009. It includes a number of measures to ensure that the needs of children and their families are at the centre of the admissions system and that all schools adopt fair and lawful admissions practices. For example, admission authorities must now consult local parents and community groups on their admission arrangements and local authorities must report annually to the schools adjudicator on the legality, effectiveness and fairness of all local admission policies.
	Data published on 12 March by the Department for Children, Schools and Families on the offers of secondary school places made to parents on 2 March 2009 show that, in London, 93.2 per cent of applicants obtained a place at one of their preferred schools—up from 92.5 per cent in 2008. 6.8 per cent of applicants did not receive an offer for one of the schools they had expressed a preference for—down from 7.5 per cent in 2008. This does not mean they are without a school place. In the majority of cases, local authorities will have made offers of a place at an alternative school or given the parents the opportunity to express further preferences for schools with vacant places. In addition, places are reallocated throughout the summer as a consequence of successful appeals and parents turning down the place they were offered.

Schools: Class Sizes

Lord Krebs: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the effect of class sizes on the academic achievement of pupils in (a) primary schools, and (b) secondary schools.

Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: Research conducted by the University of London's Institute of Education shows that smaller classes have significant effect on pupil progress, particularly for maths and literacy in reception children. There is no evidence that small classes in the junior and secondary phases have such a decisive impact on standards or child development. Research acknowledges that class size is just one of a range of factors that affect pupils' progress. Good quality teaching is the key. The Government have invested significant funding in personalised learning to support schools and teachers in tailoring their curriculum and teaching methods to meet pupils' needs.

Sri Lanka

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty's Government when they last made representations to the Government of Sri Lanka about the safety of civilians during current military operations; what was the response; whether they will ask for safe and humane treatment of non-combatant civilians; and whether they will enlist the help of relevant United Nations and humanitarian agencies.

Lord Malloch-Brown: My right honourable friends the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary have raised our concerns for the safety of civilians and the need to allow full humanitarian access in their recent discussions with President Rajapakse. The issue was most recently raised by me with the Sri Lankan Foreign Secretary on 16 March 2009. Our high commissioner in Colombo continues to raise these issues in his regular contacts with senior members of the Sri Lankan Government.
	The Government of Sri Lanka maintain that safely removing civilians from the conflict zone is a priority but that they will not halt military operations.
	We welcome the recent visit to Sri Lanka by John Holmes, UN Under-Secretary for Humanitarian Affairs, and hope this leads to an improvement in the humanitarian situation on the ground. We are aware that certain humanitarian agencies have been given access to camps for internally displaced persons.

Sudan

The Earl of Sandwich: To ask Her Majesty's Government what diplomatic representations they have made on behalf of British aid agencies threatened with expulsion from parts of north Sudan; and what response they have received.

Lord Malloch-Brown: Our ambassador in Khartoum has urged the Government of Sudan to allow non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to continue their work. The EU issued a statement on 10 March 2009 calling on the Government of Sudan urgently to reconsider their decision and ensure that humanitarian assistance to the most vulnerable people in Sudan be continuously guaranteed.
	European Foreign Ministers discussed the situation again on 16 March 2009 and reiterated this message. We have, through official and ministerial level contacts, urged China, Russia, and Sudan's African and Arab neighbours, also to press the Government of Sudan to reverse their decision.
	To date, there has been no indication that the Government of Sudan will reverse their decision and allow the 13 NGOs to remain in Sudan.

Sudan: Darfur

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty's Government how they intend that humanitarian supplies and relief work will be maintained in Darfur and eastern Sudan, following the expulsion or removal of international non-governmental organisations.

Lord Malloch-Brown: The expulsion of 13 major international (and three national) non-governmental organisations (NGOs) will have a devastating impact on levels of humanitarian assistance in Sudan.
	UN officials have told the UN Security Council that this would disrupt up to 50 per cent of the current humanitarian effort in Darfur. Consequences will be most severe in Darfur, but will also affect humanitarian, recovery and development assistance throughout north Sudan, particularly in conflict-affected regions of the transitional areas and the east.
	The UK is the second biggest bilateral humanitarian donor after the US. We have requested that the UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs briefs the UN Security Council on the current situation on the ground. Together with the UN and the NGOs we are keeping the situation under close review and are urgently exploring all options to fill the gap left by this action. Initial reports estimate that this would take months if Sudan does not reverse its decision in the near future.

UN: Durban Review Conference

Baroness Whitaker: To ask Her Majesty's Government (a) whether they will be represented at the United Nations Durban Review Conference; (b) if so, whether this representation will be at ministerial level; (c) what outcomes they hope to achieve from their participation in the conference; (d) how they will report on progress made since the 2001 conference, in particular in relation to their commitment to a national action plan against racism; and (e) how they are engaging with non-governmental organisations in the preparations for and follow-up to the conference.

Lord Malloch-Brown: The UK is still engaged in the Durban Review process and we will keep our position under review. No decisions have yet been taken on the composition of our delegation.
	The Government have on several occasions expressed their view on the Durban Review Conference, the follow-up to the 2001 World Conference Against Racism. We want the conference to forge a collective will to fight against racism in all its forms, in all countries in the world. However, the Government remain deeply concerned about the draft outcome document.
	The UK responded to a questionnaire circulated by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights that sought an assessment of how states had implemented the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action. This included information on the UK's national strategy to increase race equality and community cohesion, called Improving Opportunity, Strengthening Society, which was launched in January 2005.
	The Government have received a number of representations from non-governmental organisations on the Durban Review Conference and engage with them at every opportunity.

Water Supply

Lord Mawson: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the financial impact on churches of Ofwat's policy that all users should be charged from 2010 for the disposal of water through public sewers.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: It is for the individual companies, as private bodies, to set their own charging schemes and for Ofwat, as the independent economic regulator of the water industry, to scrutinise and approve these schemes. There is no role for my department in this process.
	In September 2003, Ofwat provided guidance (RD35/03) to companies on charging non-household premises for surface water drainage by site-based area. It said that companies which are thinking of introducing site-area charging need to assess possible impacts on all customers' bills. In particular, companies will need to take into account the scale and speed of any bill changes to see whether they are reasonable and acceptable to customers.
	The Government support site-area charging for surface water drainage in principle because it encourages measures such as permeable paving and soakaways which reduce the amount of water routed into the public sewers, which themselves have limited drainage capacity. However, they recognise that it is wrong if customers such as faith buildings are facing hikes in their bills of several hundred per cent, and where there are massive variations between what is being charged in different areas by different companies.

West Bank

Viscount Waverley: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of how many people live in Israeli settlements in the West Bank; and how many units of housing there are in those settlements.

Lord Malloch-Brown: Non-governmental organisation Peace Now released a settlement report on 27 January 2008. The report shows a significant increase in the West Bank settler population to 285,000 at the end of 2008 (an increase from 270,000 at the end of 2007). 1,518 new structures were built in settlements and outposts on the West Bank during 2008 (the term "structure" includes permanent buildings and mobile homes and single- and multiple-dwelling buildings). 927 (61 per cent) of these were built west of the route of the barrier, while 591 (39 per cent) were built to the east of the route of the barrier.
	We are very concerned about this expansion and have repeatedly made clear that we regard it as unacceptable and illegal. We will continue to reiterate this message. An EU presidency declaration on 20 February 2009 reinforced this message.

West Bank

Viscount Waverley: To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of whether further Israeli settlements are planned in the West Bank; and what steps they will take to ensure that they are not constructed.

Lord Malloch-Brown: Expansion of Israeli settlements continues. The plans for settlement construction in the vicinity of Adam in the West Bank would constitute a new settlement block.
	The EU has condemned these plans and made this clear in a declaration dated 20 February 2009. The UK fully supports this statement.

Women: Peace and Security

Lord Hylton: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether progress has been made in implementing United Nations Security Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace and Security; and, if so, under what main headings.

Lord Malloch-Brown: The implementation of UN Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1325 is a global challenge and it is not possible to provide an exhaustive list of progress made. Nationally, the UK's national action plan on UNSCR 1325 provides the framework for domestic activity and gives impetus to our global efforts that include:
	Increased representation of women at decision-making levels in conflict institutions—the UK has called for progress in the process of appointing women to senior posts in the UN. The UN Secretary General now routinely insists that there are female candidates on every shortlist for senior appointments in UN peacekeeping missions and headquarters roles.
	Gender perspectives included as part of peacekeeping operations—the UK consistently requests that women's protection issues and their role in conflict resolution is addressed in mandates for UN peacekeeping missions. Gender advisers or gender focal points are now present in UN-led peacekeeping missions.
	Training on protection, rights and needs of women in conflict—the UK has run training and awareness raising events for its conflict prevention officers, strategy managers and staff in its UN mission in New York. The UK provides peace support operations (PSO) training to peacekeepers and include aspects of UNSCR 1325, as they are covered in UK PSO doctrine and training.
	Protection of women in conflict affected areas—the adoption of UNSCR 1820 in June 2008 was a significant step forward in strengthening previous calls to address the scourge of widespread sexual violence in conflict-affected situations. The UK was a key driver behind the design and passage of this resolution.
	The Government also work on the ground in conflict and post conflict areas to further the aims of UNSCR1325.